Regularly Revisiting Goals and the OODA Loop

We do not live in a linear world. We like to think we do. Our brains prefer to fit everything into a nice linear timeline of simple causation; first, this happened, which made this happen, and that led to this, and now we are here. This type of thinking gives us a sense of understanding and predictability in the world. A linear path is how we like to lay out our plans; step 1, then step 2, then step 3, and now we’ve achieved our goal. The problem is this is not how life works. Even on my simplest projects, the plan does not go simply. There are too many variables outside of our control. How can we deal with this unpredictable complexity then?

In my previous articles, we discussed the different levels of goals, why it is important to focus on a positive future, and what SMART goals are and when to use them. I’m sure some people are confused or frustrated at this point. This is my 5th article on goal setting and now I’m telling you the path we laid out might not happen the way we want. Anyone alive long enough to be reading this should know that life is never that simple. We have to remain flexible in our plans. To remain flexible, we have to remain attentive and willing to constantly adjust when new information arrives. Luckily, there is a system for that.

Enter the OODA loop. The OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop is a framework for understanding the decision-making process. This framework was developed by a fighter pilot named John Boyd. We will not dig too deep into the history of the OODA loop here. There are many books and scholarly works on the subject. Here we will simply discuss how this applies to our goals. For that, all we need is a high-level breakdown of the system.

Here is a diagram of the process:

This looks very complicated, but the good news is we have all been doing this our entire lives. Our brains do this automatically as we go about our days. We receive an input, Observe. We put that input into context based on our current understanding of the world, Orient. We consider our options and choose one, Decide. We act on our decision, Act. The “feed forward” arrows in the diagram follow this linear progression. As stated earlier, however, we do not live in a linear world. New inputs are constantly coming in and the situation is constantly changing. Notice the “feedback” arrows that go from each step back to the observe stage. This feedback of constant observation is what creates the overlaid loops. At the top of the diagram is also “implicit guidance & control”, which simply means we do not have to decide. That action is set forth by some other entity, such as corporate policy, religious doctrine, etc.

Perhaps an example will be useful here. Let’s look at our road trip example, assuming we are not using modern GPS to do all the work for us in this example. Traffic is a simple small-scale example that a quick OODA Loop run will handle.

Observe:        We observe traffic up ahead, a new input that could change our plan.

Orient:           Based on experience, we determine that the delay will be significant, and we should take the next exit and find an alternate route. We check the map and see several alternative routes. We weigh each route, again based on our previous experience and all the data available to us.

Decide:          We pick the route we think will save the most time.

Act:                We take the exit and follow the chosen route.

Remember, that as we are following this alternate route we are constantly observing and re-evaluating our choices. Maybe a lot of other people are also taking this alternate and therefore we will not save any time. Maybe we can see the highway and we have gotten past traffic sooner than we thought so we can go back to the original. This is a constant cycle, hence the “loop”.

How does this apply to goal setting though?

For goals, and really for everything, there are multiple overlapping loops involved. The first loop is the one used to set the goal. We want our goals to be based on sound observation and put in context based on past performance and experience: observe and orient. This gives us several options to choose from, and then we execute: decide and act. As we are executing, we are also in a sub-loop. We need to constantly observe what is happening with the measurables of the goal and be ready to adjust our efforts to meet the goal, or adjust our outcomes to keep them relevant and achievable (this is not preferred but does happen). If all we do is define our end state and ignore it until the deadline is up, we have given up control and will most likely not achieve what we said we wanted to.

Back to our trip, our observations will include things such as the weather, our finances, the maintenance of our car, our friend’s availability, etc. These are all observations that we must process. We then look at these observations in context, maybe there is a huge storm coming in and we should delay the trip. Maybe we need to get the oil changed in the car and again we need to delay. Maybe some unexpected bills came in and spending the money on the trip is not the best idea anymore. How do we handle this information? We orient or evaluate and put into context the new information based on experience. How bad is the storm? Is it ok to drive through? As we look at the new data in relation to our experience we come up with choices. Then we decide on a choice and act on it. The entire time keeping an eye on all new information and constantly working our way through the loop.

Hopefully, it is clear that we need to monitor our goals along the way. We are not going to constantly watch every bit of data that comes in though, for the most part. Within our goals, we need to define what intervals to check our measurables. For a 5-year goal, we do not want to check every day or even every week or month most likely. The increment needs to relate to the length of time set for the goal and how often we can relevant data to review. Some things to consider:

           -How often can we realistically gather feedback? – We don’t want to spend all our time constantly compiling data. Consider the stock market. If we look at the market over the course of a day, we will see wild swings that you cannot get much meaningful information from. Even over the course of a week or even a month, it is hard to tell. In the case of a 401k, we have a goal that is several decades out, at the time we start it. The stock market has a general trend of going up ~7% yearly if we look at many years. If we try to look at smaller timeframes, even a full year, we will not see this trend. We may want to see how our account is doing, but any adjustments need a broader perspective.

-How will we work on the task needed to achieve our goal? – What factors can we control to correct course? We should discuss these things at the very beginning, as we are setting the goal. Everyone involved with the goal and the factors that play into the goal’s achievement needs to be part of this conversation.

           -Who will need to review the metrics? – Schedules are always an issue. We need to make sure everyone is aware of the timelines and has reviews on their calendars. The person in charge of the goal is ultimately responsible. If it is my goal, I need to make sure whoever has the data I need to know when I need it. I must give them time to compile and process that data for my review. I also need time to digest the data myself to make sure I can explain it to any other stakeholders.

What is a good interval then? It depends. For 5-year strategic goals, under normal circumstances, revisiting once per year is generally good. For yearly goals, once per month generally makes sense. For monthly goals can go with once or twice per week. These are generally good timelines as they will match a workflow and calendar. There are a few words of caution to this, however. These revisits are NOT to change the goals. The idea is simply to review the current state, observe, and make tweaks to any tasks or processes that are feeding into the goal. Meaning, if we have a 5-year goal, we keep working on it for 5 years. The only time we should completely change or revise a goal is when a major event happens.

I have a good friend whose father is a retired 2-star general for the Air National Guard. My friend’s father and I were discussing strategic planning and long-term goal setting. The General was telling me how he would get frustrated because they would go into yearly planning sessions and create 5-year goals. Then the next year they would reset the 5-year goals. They aren’t 5-year goals at that point. He is a firm believer in letting the goals playout for the initial set timeframe. One exception came to his mind, 9/11. Even if they had set their 5-year goals in August they would have to completely throw them away at that point. The world changed. The other thing about 9/11 is that it took time to figure out just how the world changed. So that observe and orient cycle needed to be extended and repeated a lot before decisions could be made. This is one of the reasons I said early on that the farther out a goal is planned, the broader it should be. We can have extremely specific 5-year goals, but they must be pursued with relentless singleness of focus. Those goals also generally rely on everything going exactly right, even factors we cannot control. The margin for error is far too small in my opinion.

This should give a clearer picture of the importance, and some of the missteps, in monitoring goals. Checking in on goals is imperative if we want to achieve them, but remember, they are not set in stone. We must remain flexible as well. In the next article, we will discuss another crucial, and often ignored, aspect of goal setting. Setting goals with other stakeholders, and not for them. This mistake is a huge problem when you work with a micromanager.

More soon.